London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
You will only have one login account. Registering with multiple accounts is not allowed. Any user found to have more than one account on this site will have all, and any future accounts suspended permanently.
Your email and password must only be used by you. If a post is made under your account, it will be considered that it was posted by yourself.
Your account nickname must not be the same, or contain, listed company names or board members' names.
While debating and discussion is fine, we will not tolerate; rudeness, swearing, insulting posts, personal attacks, or posts which are invasive of another's privacy.
You will not;
discuss illegal or criminal activities.
post any confidential or price sensitive information or that is not public knowledge.
post misleading or false statements regarding the share price and performance. Such posts are deemed as market abuse, and may be reported to the appropriate authorities.
post any private communication, or part thereof, from any other person, including from a member of the board of directors of a listed company. Such posts cannot be verified as true and could be deemed to be misleading.
post any personal details (e.g. email address or phone number).
post live price or level 2 updates.
publish content that is not your original work, or infringes the copyright or other rights of any third party.
post non-constructive, meaningless, one word (or short) non-sense posts.
post links to, or otherwise publish any content containing any form of advertising, promotion for goods and services, spam, or other unsolicited communication.
post any affiliate or referral links, or post anything asking for a referral.
post or otherwise publish any content unrelated to the board or the board's topic.
re-post premium share chat posts on regular share chat.
restrict or inhibit any other user from using the boards.
impersonate any person or entity, including any of our employees or representatives.
post or transmit any content that contains software viruses, files or code designed to interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of this website or any computer software or equipment.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium and Verified Members
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
I was doing a bit of reading on this earlier. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3513932 Is a good bit of case law on it. First solg isn't an insider. It's frankly silly to suggest it . It has no board representative and less than 10%. Secondly the PfS is being produced independently it will be silly to draw any recommendations and unlawful. The more you dig into the cgp arguments the more you realise how rubbish they are.
Good point Miagi... Do you think the other majors will want to get involved in a bidding war against two other majors who are already invested and therefore have a lot of incentive to keep bidding up to secure the prize? Will Barrick etc realistically think they can win the fight against BHP? I hope they do of course, because a 3 or 4 way bidding war between majors is exactly what we want to see to get the final price up into the £1+ range isn't it.
Native, are you referring to SOLG's takeover bid for CGP there? If not, see Quady's reply. If so, then CGP's assertion is ridiculous - it's like saying AAL would have to disclose all their innermost secrets to ARCM if they were to take them over...never going to happen.
Regarding the withholding of PFS info - good luck to CGP trying to prove that one. It will be impossible for them to do so, even if it is true that SOLG have been withholding (and I'm not saying that they have).
Good afternoon Native, they are currently developing the PFS, you cannot print bits of it in isolation, it may lead to false assumptions. Also we are not required to provide enhanced disclosure, if we have not had a takeover deal. If we have had a takeover put to us, then confidential agreements would be signed. So Cornerstone would not be aware. Cornerstone would only be made aware, if it was a bid for Alpala separately.
Food for thought regarding Solgold integrity per Cornerstone legal review: “ ...SolGold has withheld and continues to withhold material non-public information in respect of the Cascabel Project (including information on the progress of the ongoing pre-feasibility study at the Cascabel Project) from both the market and Cornerstone shareholders; is not compliant with Canadian securities laws, including the requirement that an insider (which would include SolGold by virtue of its participation, including as operator, in Exploraciones Novomining S.A. (“ENSA”), the Ecuadorian company owned by SolGold and Cornerstone that holds 100% of the Cascabel concession) provide enhanced disclosure and a formal valuation in connection with a take-over bid...”
rcgl2, even if this board does get ousted (and I'm of the mind that it won't) and they install NCM/BHP stooges, do you imagine the likes of Barrick etc won't be interested in offering a bid higher than 30p for one the best Cu/Au porphyries available, plus a world class pipeline of projects?
Just to make crystal clear Miagi, it could not be more clear on this Board that I do NOT foresee a takeover at 40/45p, nor would I be happy with that...
My view has consistently been that if there were a first bid at 40/45p it would not be taken seriously and would be quickly countered by at least one major...and that if an auction develops we could be taken out at least 100p , maybe 125p...
Hi Quady, I've had a terrible day with a power outage :-( and not looked in here all day. Not sure what has been discussed. I know I'm being vague but I've still got an electrician here sorting things so will have to get back and sort the mess out.
What I was alluding to in my last post was that Solg hold the largest and possibly the best acreage? Solgold must be near the top of the Christmas card list of the gov't if you get my drift? It could be a case of upset my friend and you upset me scenario from the gov't. I bet FN aren't too impressed either, who knows? Take care Q, must dash mate.
I wonder what the Ecuadorian gov't are thinking of CGP's behaviour? Would NCM tarnish their relationship with the gov't by getting involved in this tizzy fit? I would be very surprised if they did. I just think it's all wind and wazz.....who knows? I wonder if the Solgold legal team are looking at libel?
Hello rcgl2, A thought experiment for you, if you were going to oust the board, then you would plan it, and at the time of calling an EGM, would name the support you had, and have in place a replacement BOD. Haven't seen that.
I think what is gonna happen here is BHP will get a sweetheart takeover deal before the deadline of 19th October and Nick will recommend it to the shareholders because the other option is BHP vote in favour of ousting Nick and then They have to battle Newcrest for the scraps.
They won’t want to do this and will bid directly.
As it stands they can’t vote against the board until the end of their lockdown anyway. So we are safe for now. But the Board are slightly worried. They will be doing everything possible to calm The situation down but this is what a hostile takeover is all about.
Hi Quady, I totally agree this may never actually come to a vote, there is lots more to happen between now and any potential EGM if it ever gets called. However, I just felt that the things Phat mentioned (people from SOLG said they need PI support to fend off the attack, they will need everyone's support) suggests that the SOLG management themselves are not so sure that this would be a slam dunk for them if it actually came to a vote.
CGP only own about 7% of the shares... if they are already thinking that victory in a vote would come down to PI support, then doesn't that suggest they must think several of the other major shareholders would vote against the current board?
And I agree we don't know that NCM would support it, but the general feeling here is that their MO is to try to squeeze potential acquisitions very hard to get them for well under value, they have already very publicly criticised NM and the management over their recent funding and they desperately wanted the next stage funded by more equity (i.e. more equity bought by them)... That to me suggests they would be more than happy to see the back of NM.
Anyone with ideas on Royalty funding situation with Franco Nevada, should be anytime soon. Could light a torch under BHP’s and Newcrest butts as they will need to get a wiggle on or lose valuable profits to FNA. Of course if Franco he say NO, well that’s another story. On a spooky note just dropped my keys on to touch pad and came up ALM, the last site I commented on. Not in the least bit superstitious but one hell of a coincidence.